The focus was on the To header for mailing lists, complaints on MUAs and people's choices. If you do not want to appear in the To header of a list, you are exercising a legal right under the GDPR. So, to cut through all those problems and enforce a sound solution, I suggest list majordomos do the compliance heavy lifting by forcing a sane To header. That's all. If you want to talk more in general about GDPR, I do it everyday, so leave me alone on weekends, will you? :-)
On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 22:41, Grant Taylor <gtay...@tnetconsulting.net> wrote: > On 03/01/2019 01:25 AM, Rupert Gallagher wrote: >> A future-proof list that complies with GDPR would automatically rewrite >> the To header, leaving the list address only. > > Doesn't GDPR also include things like signatures? Thus if the mailing > list is only modifying the email metadata and not the message body (thus > signature), then it's still subject to GDPR. > > I also feel like it is a disservice to the mailing list to hide who the > message is from. But I have no idea of the legalities of (not) doing such. > >> Any other recipient will still receive it from the original sender. > > I presume you're talking about (B)CC and additional To recipients. > > I never did hear, how does GDPR play out in such a scenario. Does the > sender need to make a request to all To / (B)CC recipients for them to > forget the sender? Also, does the mailing list operator have any > responsibility to pass the request on to all subscribers to purge the > requester from their personal archives? I feel like there's a LOT of > unaddressed issues here, and that singling out the mailing list is > somewhat unfair. But life's unfair. So … ¯_(ツ)_/¯ > > -- > Grant. . . . > unix || die
